The Good Death in Early Modern Europe

IF 0.5 Q1 HISTORY
History Compass Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1111/hic3.12819
Cynthia Klestinec, Gideon Manning
{"title":"The Good Death in Early Modern Europe","authors":"Cynthia Klestinec,&nbsp;Gideon Manning","doi":"10.1111/hic3.12819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The inevitability of death does not change its variability. In <i>The Hour of Our Death</i> (1981), Philippe Ariès positioned the sudden, unexpected, mass death of epidemics (especially from the Black Death) against the personalized, domesticated death for which one had time to prepare. The domesticated death, so he argued, appeared during a specific epoche of European history and was an historical inflection point, coinciding with the 18th century Enlightenment. Ariès looked unfavorably at this climax for what he saw as a process of de-spiritualization, waning of faith, and the beginnings of commercialization and medicalization of death. Since his publications, scholars from a range of fields—history, anthropology, literature, religion, and art—have sought to address the omissions, exaggerations, and misleading claims in Ariès' account and, in doing so, have developed a rich field studying the cultural history and significance of death. Now situated in a transdisciplinary space, studying the good death and the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> (the art of the dying well) offers new perspectives and answers new questions about death. Although there is much that could be discussed, the focus here will be on recent trends in scholarship on the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> and its relationship to the interrelated histories of burial, the role of clerical and lay comforters, and the role of physicians as well as the historical and religious-philosophical problems of the prolongation of life and sudden death.</p>","PeriodicalId":46376,"journal":{"name":"History Compass","volume":"22 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12819","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History Compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12819","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The inevitability of death does not change its variability. In The Hour of Our Death (1981), Philippe Ariès positioned the sudden, unexpected, mass death of epidemics (especially from the Black Death) against the personalized, domesticated death for which one had time to prepare. The domesticated death, so he argued, appeared during a specific epoche of European history and was an historical inflection point, coinciding with the 18th century Enlightenment. Ariès looked unfavorably at this climax for what he saw as a process of de-spiritualization, waning of faith, and the beginnings of commercialization and medicalization of death. Since his publications, scholars from a range of fields—history, anthropology, literature, religion, and art—have sought to address the omissions, exaggerations, and misleading claims in Ariès' account and, in doing so, have developed a rich field studying the cultural history and significance of death. Now situated in a transdisciplinary space, studying the good death and the tradition of ars moriendi (the art of the dying well) offers new perspectives and answers new questions about death. Although there is much that could be discussed, the focus here will be on recent trends in scholarship on the tradition of ars moriendi and its relationship to the interrelated histories of burial, the role of clerical and lay comforters, and the role of physicians as well as the historical and religious-philosophical problems of the prolongation of life and sudden death.

现代早期欧洲的美好死亡
死亡的不可避免性并不会改变它的多变性。在《我们的死亡时刻》(1981 年)一书中,菲利普-阿里斯将流行病(尤其是黑死病)造成的突然、意外、大规模死亡与人们有时间准备的个性化、驯化的死亡相提并论。他认为,驯化的死亡出现在欧洲历史的特定时期,是一个历史拐点,与 18 世纪的启蒙运动相吻合。阿利埃斯对这一高潮持否定态度,他认为这是一个去精神化、信仰消退的过程,也是死亡商业化和医学化的开端。自从他的著作发表以来,来自历史学、人类学、文学、宗教和艺术等不同领域的学者一直在努力解决阿里斯的论述中存在的遗漏、夸大和误导性说法,并在此过程中发展出了一个研究死亡的文化历史和意义的丰富领域。现在,在一个跨学科的空间里,研究美好的死亡和 ars moriendi(临终的艺术)传统提供了新的视角,回答了关于死亡的新问题。虽然可以讨论的内容很多,但本文的重点将是关于 "安乐死 "传统的最新学术趋势及其与相互关联的丧葬史、教士和非专业安抚者的作用、医生的作用以及延长生命和猝死的历史和宗教哲学问题之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History Compass
History Compass HISTORY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信